From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>
To: "augustocaringi@gmail.com" <augustocaringi@gmail.com>,
"jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"emilne@redhat.com" <emilne@redhat.com>,
"andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com"
<andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"sagi@grimberg.me" <sagi@grimberg.me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: srp_transport: Fix 'always false comparison' in srp_tmo_valid()
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 15:11:43 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1485443483.2980.1.camel@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1485429447-19103-1-git-send-email-augustocaringi@gmail.com>
On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 11:17 +0000, Augusto Mecking Caringi wrote:
> In a 64bit system (where long is 64bit wide), even dividing LONG_MAX by
> HZ will always be bigger than the max value that an int variable can
> hold.
>
> This has been detected by building the driver with W=1:
>
> drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c: In function ‘srp_tmo_valid’:
> drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c:92:19: warning: comparison is always
> false due to limited range of data type [-Wtype-limits]
> if (dev_loss_tmo >= LONG_MAX / HZ)
> ^
>
> Signed-off-by: Augusto Mecking Caringi <augustocaringi@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c
> index b87a786..d8c83f4 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c
> @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ int srp_tmo_valid(int reconnect_delay, int fast_io_fail_tmo, int dev_loss_tmo)
> if (fast_io_fail_tmo < 0 &&
> dev_loss_tmo > SCSI_DEVICE_BLOCK_MAX_TIMEOUT)
> return -EINVAL;
> - if (dev_loss_tmo >= LONG_MAX / HZ)
> + if (dev_loss_tmo >= INT_MAX / HZ)
> return -EINVAL;
> if (fast_io_fail_tmo >= 0 && dev_loss_tmo >= 0 &&
> fast_io_fail_tmo >= dev_loss_tmo)
This patch is wrong. The purpose of the dev_loss_tmo >= LONG_MAX / HZ check
is to avoid that the expression 1UL * dev_loss_tmo * HZ further down
overflows. Can you check whether changing the if-statement into if (1UL *
dev_loss_tmo >= LONG_MAX / HZ) also suppresses the compiler warning?
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-26 15:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-26 11:17 [PATCH] scsi: srp_transport: Fix 'always false comparison' in srp_tmo_valid() Augusto Mecking Caringi
2017-01-26 15:11 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2017-01-27 10:06 ` Augusto Mecking Caringi
2017-01-27 19:42 ` Bart Van Assche
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1485443483.2980.1.camel@sandisk.com \
--to=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=augustocaringi@gmail.com \
--cc=emilne@redhat.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox